Re: Issue 1089 in lilypond: DynamicTextSpanner not printed

[Xavier Scheuer]

2010/5/27 <address@hidden>:

> Comment #4 on issue 1089 by Carl.D.Sorensen: DynamicTextSpanner not
> printed
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1089
>
> There was a decision to add a bit of space to separate the cresc.
> from the p.  In so doing, the available space became too short to fit
> both.  If there were a warning, the user could make the necessary
> adjustments.
>
> I actually don't think that 2.10.33 is correct!  The crescendo is
> supposed to end on the 2nd note in the measure according to the input
> code.  But the text spanner goes to at least the 3rd note of the
> measure, and might be interpreted as going to the 4th.  So, even
> though 2.10.33 prints cresc., I don't think the output is consistent
> with the input.

Hi Carl!

I'm sorry but I don't totally agree.
Actually I think 2.10.33 output is more correct than the current one.

Of course we are speaking about a "theorical case": textual cresc. are
not supposed to end on the note directly after the one it starts from,
they are usually used to display long progressive crescendos...
(for the record I had to use it as a workaround to
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2010-05/msg00171.html ).

But if the input is so I think the best output is to print the textual
cresc even if it overflows the note it is supposed to end on.
At least I consider this better than not printing the "cresc." at all!

I'm not sure I have understood the code-related reason why it is not
displayed now, so I don't know if it is easily feasable to make
LilyPond actually print it.  So if it's not possible right now, of
course the warning is a good idea (hence my previous sentence "The
worst is that it does not even give a warning!").

Thanks for your attention,
Xavier

--
Xavier Scheuer <address@hidden>